Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 09:17, 17 March 2018

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Western world article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 3 months

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Geography Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Geography To-do list: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : See Requested articles/Social sciences/Geography, cities, regions and named places and Missing articles about Locations Assess : Tag related article talk pages with {{WikiProject Geography}}. To help assess the quality and importance of geography articles, please see: Unassessed geography articles and Unknown-importance geography articles. Cleanup : See Geography articles needing attention Deletion sorting : Listed at Geographic related deletion discussions Geographical coordinates : See Articles missing geocoordinate data by country Infobox : See Geography articles needing infoboxes Map : See Misplaced Pages requested maps Notability : See Geography articles with topics of unclear notability Photo : See Misplaced Pages requested photographs of places Stubs : See Geography stubs Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Culture Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of culture on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CultureWikipedia:WikiProject CultureTemplate:WikiProject Cultureculture Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Europe Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Europe, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to European topics of a cross-border nature on Misplaced Pages.EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject EuropeTemplate:WikiProject EuropeEurope Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Christianity: Catholicism Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Catholicism (assessed as Mid-importance).

Tip: #section links are case-sensitive on most browsers Links from this article with broken #section links : ] You can remove this template after fixing the problems | FAQ | Report a problem

Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia are not newly industrialised countries. I do not understand why someone still insert this nonesence. Newly industrialized countries are South Africa, Mexico, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand and Turkey. source: https://en.wikipedia.org/Newly_industrialized_country Period! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:1028:96CA:4526:416E:944E:96F9:61E1 (talk) 10:25, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

I removed the sentence: „… although the OECD includes countries, namely, Chile, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Mexico, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia and Turkey, that are not yet fully industrial countries, but newly industrialised countries.“. It is nonsense. Newly industrialized countries are South Africa, Mexico, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand and Turkey. source: https://en.wikipedia.org/Newly_industrialized_country Btw: Czech republic is industrial country for past 200 years.

Map

Samuel P. Huntington includes Papua New Guinea in his vision of the Western world... and there are nomadic peoples living in bushes over there... I mean, jeez... @User:Concus Cretus Ernio48 (talk) 15:23, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Ah, yes, the map. We seem to be disagreeing about exactly which map to use. Would someone like to propose a criterion by which we might decide which one to use, rather than everyone just picking their favourite? William M. Connolley (talk) 20:36, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Verifiability is a criterion, and maps that are not based on a published reliable source are original research of an individual editor (such as EEA+Anglosphere), which is undesirable on Misplaced Pages. I updated the map, so now its shows the Western civilizations as well as the context of the Orthodox and Latin American, according to its source's definition.--Concus Cretus (talk) 06:54, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Why would you include the Orthodox world? And that inclusion of Papua New Guinea is still a bad joke.Ernio48 (talk) 08:25, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Until there is a correct map with nobody disputing it, there shouldn't be any.Ernio48 (talk) 08:27, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Read Verifiability. It is not up to an editor to decide what is "the west" and what is not. Misplaced Pages articles are based on sources, not on Misplaced Pages editor's opinions, and Misplaced Pages does not revise sources to try to find or fabricate some kind of "truth". The Orthodox civilization is shown because the article body explains how both the Orthodox as well as the Latin American are related to the Western world via Christianity; so it reflects the article.

There is no such thing as a "correct map". Misplaced Pages uses a verifiable map that is based on a reliable source published by a respected scholar on the topic. Please read Misplaced Pages:Five pillars to see how Misplaced Pages content is written.--Concus Cretus (talk) 08:41, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Huntington must have been high on pot when he made this map. Just sayin'.Ernio48 (talk) 09:14, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

"12 November" CC map for reference

The term Western world's narrative is long an amorphous, just looking at the lede sentences. The Huntington map is prohibitively flawed and specific to be in this article let alone the most prominent image. See religion in Kazakhstan for another example, the religion is majority muslim (70.2%). The narrative of the term goes back into Greco-Roman times, thus pre-Islam and pre-Christianity. It feels there is an agenda to having Huntington's ideas "at the top"; note he was born in 1927 and died 2008. This article is not about "Western" (not all of "Western world"?), "Orthodox" (Orthodox christianity?), and "Latin American" (what is implied here?) versus the rest of the World. X1\ (talk) 00:04, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

It is not up to an editor of Misplaced Pages to decide whether the content of a reliable source is "flawed" or not. That would be POV. This article is about "western world", and a we have a reliable source by a prominent author that defines a map of the western world. Editors are not supposed to review sources into some kind of "truth". The fact that an editor disagrees with some point in a reliable published source is not a basis for Misplaced Pages to start removing notable encyclopedic content.--Concus Cretus (talk) 11:31, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

What page is your map on in the Huntington book? I've only found one similar to File:Clash of Civilizations mapn2.png ... X1\ (talk) 23:34, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

There was a consensus for the image until you removed it. The fact that you have questions about the map is not reason for removal before reaching consensus to remove it. If I have a question about a map in an article, I don't start discussion by removing it. The answer to your question is page 26 and it was added to the file description too. Please don't remove content unless you have an actual basis to do so. Thanks.--Concus Cretus (talk) 02:15, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

@William M. Connolley:, @Ernio48: Has anyone verified that page 26 of the 1997 The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order has the current ConcusCretus map, as I have only found one similar to File:Clash of Civilizations mapn2.png ? X1\ (talk) 22:19, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

No. This map is one big joke and including it in this article is a shame to Misplaced Pages.Ernio48 (talk) 22:22, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

So no wp:Consensus to keep CC map. As far as I have found it appears wp:OR. Remove (yet again)? Would you do it, as I don't want a hint of edit warring? X1\ (talk) 00:25, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is not a democracy where you vote for a solution instead of giving actual arguments based on WP rules. The fact that you personally don't believe in a given printed source because you personally don't have an easy access to it at hand, is irrelevant. There is no basis for your claims about original research as the map is according to the given source. Your attitude is contrary to WP:AGF andy your argument is pure POV. Clearly, the fact that you are switching between different unrelated reasons why the map should be removed, displays your POV: at first you say the map's content is "flawed", then you say the file is original research: both are unsubstantiated.--Concus Cretus (talk) 02:05, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, no one is claiming they don't believe in a source because they lack access to it. X1\ is saying they've looked at the source and the map does not appear. As far as I can tell, this is correct. The book does not have a map like File:Western world Samuel P Huntington.svg. The only map it has is as X1\ has said, like File:Clash of Civilizations mapn2.png. I don't agree with X1\ that this is OR, removing extraneous information from a map may be resonable if it's supported by the text of the source. But the fact remains, X1\'s basic claim is as said, AFAICT correct. The map does not feature in the book. So it's not helpful to suggest they are complaining about a lack of access when they've specifically noted they looked at the source and the map does not feature, something which I think anyone who looked at the source should be aware of. (Unless I missed the map somehow, but I doubt it.) If the map stays, I think the description page needs to be modified to make it clear this is not simply a recreation of the map in the book, but rather a recreation only showing the civilisations the author calls Christian civilisations with a citation to the part of the book where it's mentioned that these 3 are Christian civilisations. Nil Einne (talk) 14:13, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

@Nil Einne:, Thank you for your response! The author's book it not about Christianity, it is an exploration of the meaning and definition of civilizations and societies over time. Map 1.3 (on the page 26-27 of the 1996/7 book) is just one of many possible "maps" the author alludes too, as on pages 44-47. In fact on the top of page 47, the author states "the West" cannot be found on a map. I have doubts the map creator has read much or any of the author's book which his says it is from, and the author says nothing about the chosen three "civilizations" being exclusively christian (not "extraneous information"), in fact, the author talks of how "the great missionary religions of, Christianity and Islam, encompass societies from a variety of races." (page 42), "Civilizations have no clear-cut boundaries ..." (page 43), "civilizations are cultural not political entities, ..." (page 44). Of the three civilizations chosen by the editor, the author compares and contrasts their connections and differences in various ways, whether they are "West" or not. The most likely "West", the author appears to have labeled "Western" in map 1.3. This article is about "Western world", not the author's book, not an editor choice of altering what an author says and then attributing it to that author. This is may explain why I thought of wp:OR and maybe not-NPOV (wp:AGENDA), or more, but I am new to this. Am I missing something? I have been doing wp:BRD here, or would an OR noticeboard be the next step, or somewhere else? Where do I go to resolve this/these issue(s)? The only one defending inclusion of the map the editor created is that editor. There is no consensus to keep that editor's creation, and certainly the editor's map should not be attributed to the author and his book, which includes in the Commons. X1\ (talk) 22:46, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Selecting a part of a source is not OR. The same way using one paragraph of a news article for sourcing a statement on Misplaced Pages is not OR. I made edits to the description as suggested by Nil Einne to clarify that the highlighted area is selected out of several and also I deleted "Orthodox" and "Latin American" to make the map more focused with only "Western" (clear browser image cache if the old one appears). The quotes you cite can be added to the article of course, however, they don't change the fact that a simple map of the West has been published by Huntington, a recognized scholar. As for "consensus", I don't see any consensus that states that articles on topics like this one should not include a map. This map is precisely sourced. Comparable articles typically use a map as well.. East Asian cultural sphere, Central Europe etc. Issuing a ban on including a map is what a new consensus would be necessary for.--Concus Cretus (talk) 13:03, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

@Nil Einne: Here is CC's new map (below). Very different map, with very similar problems. CC's new map is also not in Huntington's book. The problem is not and never has been whether the author's works can be used as a reference in this article. This is not one of the author's maps, it is CC's. CC, please provide the page and sentence in the author's book that details all of and only the countries you have included in your map, as has been previously requested. X1\ (talk) 14:10, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

"23 December" CC map

Your arguments are running in circles. This map is based on the Huntington's map (not a list), extracting the Western civilization, to highlight it for this article. It extracts information for this specific article. If you believe there is a problem with the map, then you can describe it.--Concus Cretus (talk) 14:39, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

@Concus Cretus: No it is not. Read the book, and see if he says that, then bring that evidence here. If what I have bolded above is not enough evidence for you against inclusion, I will paste more quotes from the author's book.

@William M. Connolley: @Ernio48: Do you have input? X1\ (talk) 15:05, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Again the book has a map on page 26 (scan). No editor is obliged to bring a book to someone in order to add content to WP. The map in the article is expressing the author's map, not the author's quotes. The same with File:Clash of Civilizations mapn2.png in Western World#Modern definitions. Trying to discredit the author's map with his own quotes is original research. You have never stated where you believe the map derived from Huntington's map is wrong since the beginning of the discussion. The map is derived from it precisely, extracting the stated content about the West. Express your issues precisely with basis in WP policy or stop repeating yourself.--Concus Cretus (talk) 15:13, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

No. Huntington's map, in context, is on page 26-27, not yours. X1\ (talk) 15:25, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

No what? Can you express yourself in full sentences and finally state your actual issue?--Concus Cretus (talk) 15:31, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Stop bothering me, and backup your side with evidence of what you say. Reread what the other editors have said and asked of you in this section. If you do not satisfactorily meet what is asked, the group will not give you consensus to include. Now get to work, and stop with the psychobabble b.s., or end your drive for inclusion of one of your maps. X1\ (talk) 15:44, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

A consensus for including what Huntington defined as the "Western civilization" has been in this article for ages, as that definition is included in Modern definitions section in form of a comprehensive map. Lead section merely serves to summarize major points from the article body for the readers to get an overview of the article. Since you refuse to explain your repeated removals of that content, it will be treated as vandalism.--Concus Cretus (talk) 16:24, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

This is not an article about Huntington's theory, and using a lead map that only uses Huntington's very limited definition of the West, which excludes Greece (traditionally considered the foundation of Western philosophy) is a severe violation of NPOV. Plumber (talk) 06:42, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

@Filelakeshoe:@Itsyoungrapper:@Plumber:@William M. Connolley:@Nil Einne:@Ernio48: The map that matches Huntington's book (page 26-27) is Clash of Civilizations mapn2.png:

not the various versions (particularly "23 December" and "12 November" of Western world Samuel P Huntington.svg:

"23 December" map = Western world Samuel P Huntington.svg

which distort Huntington's example at French Guiana (see "African" missing) and the Philippines ("Islamic" missing from Mindanao and "Sinic" missing from Luzon, generally). There has been various attempts from various editor to point-out the error of altering an accurate representation of Huntington map (1.3)

This has been no consensus to readd any version (such as "23 December" and "12 November" versions) of Western world Samuel P Huntington.svg. X1\ (talk) 00:19, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

This article is about "Western world", so other "civilizations" are left out intentionally.--Concus Cretus (talk) 03:02, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Note: the "File:Western world Samuel P Huntington.svg" has been changed yet again; French Guiana (with "gradient"). X1\ (talk) 23:49, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Now that the map has removed the Orthodox and Latin American civilisations and only shows the civilisation that the author themselves described as Western and makes this clear on the map description, my concerns are mostly addressed. I have no comment on whether or not to include the map in the article. Nil Einne (talk) 04:48, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

"Gradient" not explained (no "gradients" in book), and the Philippines is even worse (only part is outlined, and it appears just the beach shore is "Western"). X1\ (talk) 21:30, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

None of what you say are new arguments. Your complaints are about intentional graphical choices that are free to be done by an editor to extract information from a source. A map or image doesn't have to follow same color/style/graphic as the source to express its content. The image that you try to insert also has differences in style from the source. Gradient is more obvious than dividing a country into 2 halves (which makes it look like two territories at a glance); secondly Philippines are marked as per source, I can't help you if you can't see the source. Besides, the map that you are trying to insert is missing Hong Kong and several smaller islands that are marked as Western in the source. As I said, since you bring no arguments, your removals are treated as vandalism.--Concus Cretus (talk) 00:17, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Western world. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://mars.wnec.edu/~grempel/courses/wc2/lectures/industrialrev.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110429013145/http://www.brasembottawa.org/en/culture_academic/fine_arts.html to http://www.brasembottawa.org/en/culture_academic/fine_arts.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090417075124/http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.11413/pub_detail.asp to http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.11413/pub_detail.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:24, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Contrsx concretus (or whatever his name is ), and lead maps.

For the record, I meant “ Cold War definition” and not “ Cold Wa rin my edit summary. Thank you.Anu-Dingir (Please offer a sacrifice!!!!) 04:18, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Removal of sourced content

User:Jeuryabuese, the sources clearly states Judaism:

• "Hebraism, like Hellenism, has been an all-important factor in the development of Western Civilization;"
• "the civilization of western Europe and of America— have been shaped chiefly by Judaeo–Graeco–Christianity, Catholic and Protestant."
• "Western civilization is also sometimes described as "Christian" or "Judaeo- Christian" civilization".
• "Judaism has played a significant role in the development of Western culture because of its unique relationship with Christianity, the dominant religious force in the West"

Do you have any valid reason to state before this is being taken to an admin? Infantom (talk) 22:20, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

First of all, I am a newbie here and you show a little bit of aggression (See:before this is being taken to an admin?). Second, to repeat the sources speak of Judaism, as only indirectly involved (because it is a precursor of Christianity) not directly like the Greco-Roman world in Europe. Plus, the Judeo-Christian concept is a new one (20th-century American concept). I could suggest that you create a new section Hebraism (like the one that exists right now Hellenism) BUT not including it into the lede of the article.Jeuryabuese (talk) 22:31, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Your opinion is nice but contradicts the sources, i see no reason to argue about interpretations when there are such clear sources. Infantom (talk) 22:50, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

• Additional source: "Judaism has influenced western civilization in a multitude of ways."

This seems like a specific enough a question that it would be a very good candidate for an WP:RFC, so long as it is concise and neutrally worded. GMG 23:31, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

User:GreenMeansGo, care to comment on the sources themselves? It seems that Jeuryabuese making up baseless excuses also completely irrelevant to what the sources state. So what if "Judeo-Christian" is a "new" term? What does it have to with legitimacy of the claim? It's a common term used by scholars. Nothing but excuses. Plus, the same sources that mention Christianity, mention Judaism as well, but for some reason Christianity is ok. Infantom (talk) 11:16, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Well, one way or the other, per guidance at MOS:LEAD, the lead should summarize the body, and it doesn't look like it is covered really at all in the body that I'm seeing. GMG 13:03, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

User:GreenMeansGo, that's ok, i'll add the relevant information (similar to this). I would like to hear your opinion about the sources, since that's the "controversial" issue here. ThanksInfantom (talk) 13:38, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Umm... it's a little hard to judge them thoroughly since they don't appear to be available online (and I haven't had access to a university library in ten odd years). So it's hard to tell if the passages quoted are from a single isolated statement, or a summary from a work which treats the topic in greater detail throughout, which would mean more as far as determining the WP:DUEWEIGHT. GMG 13:42, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

1) The last two are accessible ], . 2) shouldn't we remove the entire sentence then? as it relies on the same sources as well. Infantom (talk) 13:49, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Another source . Infantom (talk) 13:54, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

It's not absolutely required that sources be available online, or even in English, although it does make it difficult to discuss them for those who don't have easy access. Tertiary sources like Britannica are often the most useful in determining relative weight, while sources like the Patterson book are often the most useful in writing the meat of the content. I would say overall the point is moot until we have a section in the article to summarize in the lead. Without it, we can't really judge whether we're summarizing it well or not. GMG 14:08, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

User:GreenMeansGo, Ok, thanks. I'll add the relevant information when the protection expires, there's a great information in the related 'history of western world' articles. BTW the other sections, 'Roman Empire', 'Hellenic', and 'Christian schism' are not sourced at all. Generally there are problems with the entire article. Infantom (talk) 14:25, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Hold up. Why does it mean that we should remove the entire sentence if the sources are from a single source (which they are not)? Also, it is patently not true that the sections "Hellenism", "Roman empire", "Christian schism" are "not sourced at all", though I agree that there is some original research at work here, particularly adding some outdated Enlightenment scholarship (most of which I have removed, the rest seemed to be summaries of stuff from other articles, which can be easily fixed by getting the sources of those articles and giving them to the relevant material) Also, why are the sources the "main issue" here? They are reliable and say what every history book and scholar say.Anu-Dingir (Please offer a sacrifice!!!!) 22:54, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Have a look at the comment i replied to. Shouldn't it be relevant to the rest as well? "Christian schism" has no sources at all while the rest have only one source each. (for the record i don't think we should remove anything). As for the sources, i totally agree. "Judaism" was removed by an editor who ruled them out, that's why i initiated this discussion. Glad to see there's a sufficient agreement here. I'll add a relevant section to the body of the article and that should resolve the dispute. Cheers. Infantom (talk) 23:37, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

I have added a section about Judaism with additional sources. I also modified the lead per MOS:LEAD. Infantom (talk) 23:11, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

POV-pushing in the lede

I have removed the following text on the grounds that it is not backed by the sources used. Ditto with this pic , it is totally undue, especially its placement at the top of the article. Khirurg (talk) 16:28, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

It is backed by an entire section and numerous sources in the body of the article, plus the introduction. All the sources explicitly state "Judaism". Where exactly is the POV? Why is the source of prof. Art Marmorstein from Northern State University is undue? seems like excuses to avoid mentioning non European influence. Edited again per MOS:LEAD Infantom (talk) 17:30, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Ok, that's better. I can work with that. Khirurg (talk) 18:07, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry but your last edit isn't good enough, definitely not fully aligned with the sources. First you removed new sources i have added with no reason, and that's not the first time. Second, there are many sources which explicitly state major Judaism/Jewish/Israelite impact. What you did was downplaying other influences and attributing them more minor role. Western world isn't founded solely on Greek and Roman cultures, no source in the article support such thing. As long as Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome are mentioned instead of roman culture and Hellenism so should Ancient Israel instead of Judaism. Infantom (talk) 23:24, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

One thing is "Impact" and other thing is what means " Western world", if we follow the POV of some users here , then we can add also Iran and India in the lead section, why not?. romans and greeks are enough for the lead. you guys only focus in the hebrew version of the bible. that seems to me very POV patriotic and Im not beeing racist as someone have called me here.LuigiPortaro29 (talk) 23:40, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

You keep avoiding the sources and pushing your own personal opinion. Where did you see a focus only on the "Hebrew bible"? read the article for a change instead of reverting all the time. There's nothing to do with "patriotism", there are 10 sources that support the current version and an entire section. And yes, Near East civilizations should also be mentioned (i'm the one who added them in the first place) if there are sufficient sources. This is probably goes to dispute resolution. Infantom (talk) 23:52, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

"Impact" and "Influence" are one thing, but "founding" is something completely different. None of these sources back the "founding" claim. This is intellectual dishonesty and needs to stop. Khirurg (talk) 00:18, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

"West" in "Western" comes from Western Christianity, and one of the sources speaks of Jesus as the foundation of Western civilization. Another speaks of Western civilization as chiefly built from Catholic-Protestant Christianity. The Romans and Greeks did not think of themselves as "the West", and were separate from the Nords and Scandinavians, who only became part of the West, like Greece and Rome, through Christianity.Anu-Dingir (Please offer a sacrifice!!!!) 01:55, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Speaking of Nords, only after the Germanic peoples are mentioned and the Near Eastern peoples expanded in the body can the Ancient Near Eastern peoples be mentioned in the lead.Anu-Dingir (Please offer a sacrifice!!!!) 02:22, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

No, Jesus is not the "foundation of Western Civilization". I'm starting to get the impression that it is futile discussing with someone with your views, not to mention your fellow edit-warrior, who has a somewhat different motivation, although same difference in the end. Khirurg (talk) 04:32, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Don't be autistic, and don't play the victim. Do you realize how ridiculous you sound?Anu-Dingir (Please offer a sacrifice!!!!) 09:11, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Jesus is not the foundation according to autistic slags like you. Even anti-Christian scholars say otherwise. Your bullying behavior almost got me to forget that you slimy POV-warrior.09:17, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Analysis of sources

Several strong claims are currently being pushed in the article by a couple of editors (Infantom, LittleDipper), for example that "The West was and is founded upon Christianity, ... through which it is founded upon... Ancient Israel/Judaism", or that "Ancient Israelite Judaism is the foundation of Western morality." and several others to that effect. These are very strong claims. In addition the two editors are edit-warring to have this picture

placedg it at the very top of the article for maximum visibility. Below I analyze the whether the claim "| "The West was and is founded upon Christianity, ... through which it is founded upon... Ancient Israel/Judaism" is backed by the sources.

Source	Verdict	Comment
Andrea C. Paterson (2009). Three Monotheistic Faiths - Judaism, Christianity, Islam: An Analysis and Brief History. AuthorHouse. pp. 39–. ISBN 978-1-4343-9246-6."Judaism has influenced western civilization in a multitude of ways"	No	"Influence" is not the same as "founding", published is Authorhouse, a self-publishing outfit , does not meet WP:RS
Marvin Perry (1 January 2012). Western Civilization: A Brief History, Volume I: To 1789. Cengage Learning. pp. 33–. ISBN 1-111-83720-1."We talk of a Judeo-Christian tradition as an essential component of western civilization"	No	Nothing about "Ancient Israel", "essential component" not the same as "founding". High school textbook, low quality tertiary source, to be avoided per WP:PSTS
Role of Judaism in Western culture and civilization, "Judaism has played a significant role in the development of Western culture because of its uniqurelationship with Christianity, the dominant religious force in the West". Judaism at Encyclopædia Britannica	No	Many cultures played a "significant role in the development of western culture, but that's not the same as founding it. Britannica is a generalist tertiary source best avoided per WP:PSTS.
Jonathan Daly (19 December 2013). The Rise of Western Power: A Comparative History of Western Civilization. A&C Black. pp. 21–. ISBN 978-1-4411-1851-6."Another people contributed richly to the rise of the west without ever founding an empire of ruling a large territory: the Jews."	No	"contributed richly", definitely, founding, no.
Prof. Art Marmorstein, Northern State University, ANCIENT ISRAEL (THE HEBREWS) "Still, the Israelites had a major impact on Western civilization"	No	Excerpt from website, self-published, does not meet RS.
Cambridge University Historical Series, An Essay on Western Civilization in Its Economic Aspects, p.40: Hebraism, like Hellenism, has been an all-important factor in the development of Western Civilization; Judaism, as the precursor of Christianity, has indirectly had had much to do with shaping the ideals and morality of western nations since the christian era.	No	Key word here is "indirectly"
Caltron J.H Hayas, Christianity and Western Civilization (1953),Stanford University Press, p.2: That certain distinctive features of our Western civilization — the civilization of western Europe and of America— have been shaped chiefly by Judaeo–Graeco–Christianity, Catholic and Protestant.	No	"certain features have been shaped", yes, "founding", no
Horst Hutter, University of New York, Shaping the Future: Nietzsche's New Regime of the Soul And Its Ascetic Practices (2004), p.111:three mighty founders of Western culture, namely Socrates, Jesus, and Plato.	No	Meant somewhat tongue-in-cheek
Religions in Global Society – Page 146, Peter Beyer – 2006	unknown	No quote provided
Fred Reinhard Dallmayr, Dialogue Among Civilizations: Some Exemplary Voices (2004), p.22: Western civilization is also sometimes described as "Christian" or "Judaeo- Christian" civilization.	No	"sometimes described" is very different from founding

About half the sources are low quality or do not meet WP:RS. None of them explicitly back the strong claim that "Western civilization is founded upon Judaism". Based on this, I think it's fine to say in the lede that Judaism had a significant effect/contribution/influence/shaped western civ, but not that Western civilization is "founded" upon it on par with ancient Greece and Rome. "Ancient Israel" is an anachronism and not used by any sources, and should not be used here either. I also feel the picture is WP:UNDUE, especially at the top of the article. Khirurg (talk) 06:13, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Pleas explain how half of the sources do not meet WP:RS. Also I am not the one saying Jesus is the foundation of Western civilization, it is just what the source says.Anu-Dingir (Please offer a sacrifice!!!!) 09:03, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Also please stop pretending that we are the ones who are close-minded and biased here when we are just backing what scholars in the field say. And please tell us the methodology you used to analyze these sources. And do you know what "anachronism" even means? We have an article called "History of ancient Israel and Judah. Please stop with your non-scholarly bullshit.Anu-Dingir (Please offer a sacrifice!!!!) 09:07, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

• All unassessed articles
• C-Class geography articles
• Mid-importance geography articles
• WikiProject Geography articles
• C-Class culture articles
• Mid-importance culture articles
• WikiProject Culture articles
• C-Class Europe articles
• Mid-importance Europe articles
• WikiProject Europe articles
• C-Class Christianity articles
• Mid-importance Christianity articles
• C-Class Catholicism articles
• Mid-importance Catholicism articles
• WikiProject Catholicism articles
• WikiProject Christianity articles